On 30 Jan 2013, at 11:39, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Bruno Marchal

The religion I refer to is grounded in subjectivity,
that is to say, trust (1p), not 3p.  Experience,
not deswcriptions. Science is based not on experience,
but on descriptions, 3p.

Not really. We have to do experiences, but we can assess the result only from the 1p.



And these are based on words,
which are constructred and interpreted
with reason.

As I think all experiences should be.

Bruno






----- Receiving the following content -----
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-28, 14:23:07
Subject: Re: Facts, values, and "Non-overlapping magisteria"

Hi Roger Clough,

On 27 Jan 2013, at 14:03, Roger Clough wrote:

Hi Bruno Marchal

My view that science and religion are mutually exclusive
is certainly not true of catholics, who at least since
Aquinas, believe that truth is reason-based. And even
Luther mellowed a bit in later years against his harsh view
of reason (which opposes faith).

But, having said that, nevertheless I hold with Stephan Jay Gould's position, that of

"Non-overlapping magisteria"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-overlapping_magisteria
"Non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA) is the view advocated by Stephen Jay Gould that

science and religion each have "a legitimate magisterium, or domain of teaching authority," and

these two domains do not overlap.[1] He suggests, with examples, that "NOMA enjoys

strong and fully explicit support, even from the primary cultural stereotypes of hard-line

traditionalism" and that it is "a sound position of general consensus, established by long

 struggle among people of goodwill in both magisteria."[2]

Despite this there continues to be disagreement over where the boundaries between the two magisteria should be.[3]


It just means the humans are perhaps not yet mature enough to use reason, that is modest hypotheses and sharable rules of reasoning, on the fundamentals.

Stephan Jay Gould's proposes a statu quo which is made possible by the fact that science and religion, with the notable exception of the mystics and the (neo)Platonists, share basically the same naturalism/weak-materialism. Eventually they differ only by the "fairy tales".

I believe the complete contrary. Theology differs from physics because it studies other object/subject. And theories can sometimes get reduced to subtheories of other theories. We have to be open minded, notably on Platonism.

So if we are inclined to *search* the possible truth, I think we should remain one and honest in any field.

A religion which fears the scientific method can only be based on lies or bad faith.

I do think we should respect the fairy tales, but not use them to prevent progresses on the deep questions. I do think that the fairy tales can have a lot to teach us, like also the legends and the great literature, but no prose at all should ever be taken literally, as this multiplies unnecessary oppositions, and can only hide the possible truth that the honest people are searching.

Stephan Jay Gould just makes into a principle the abandon of what I think is the most fundamental field, theology, to the irrationalists, the obscurantist, the fear sellers, the wishful thinkers, the terrorful thinkers, etc.

I don't think we have the luxury in the coming times to continue of being purposefully not serious in the human affairs, and on the fundamental possibilities.

With comp, well understood, the human and the machine, are immune (in the ideal case) to reductionism, and neoplatonism gives a tremendous importance to the person, and the listening to person (whatever are their clothes or bodies). They remains an essential gap on which human can test different colors and things.

But ceasing to search in that field after the discovery-reapparition of the universal machine, would be like, to me, deciding to abandon space exploration, or closing the Hubble telescope, etc.

If you don't listen to the machines, you will not succeed in convincing them about any of your ideas.


Bruno






----- Receiving the following content -----
From: Bruno Marchal
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2013-01-27, 07:05:33
Subject: Re: Facts vs values


On 25 Jan 2013, at 16:38, Alberto G. Corona wrote:

Dear Roger,
This is the lutheran view. That磗 fine. I love lutherans. but this work as long as you have faith. But once leave the faith, people have no guide in very important things and fall in primitive cults with a modern facade. For this reason I advocate the scientific study of faith, belief, morals etc.

I particularly don磘 feel comfortable talking about subjects like this in this group. But belief, and shared beliefs, is an irreductible component of what we call "reality".

Separating science and religion makes both science and religion into pseudo-science and pseudo-religion.

There is no science, there is only people able to stay calm in front of ignorance, I think.

Bruno





2013/1/25 Roger Clough <rclo...@verizon.net>

I have no conflict being a scientist when I deal with science, and being
    a Christian when I deal with the Bible.

Or with science when I deal with science and with aesthetics when
    I visit an art museam. Or go to a concert.

Or with being a scientist when I deal with the Big Bang
    and being a Christian when I read Genesis. Two different
    accounts, from two different realms, of the same event.

Science has its own realm of validity in the realm of facts,
    but has no place -not even a foothold-- in the world of values.

The difference between a fool and a wise man is in knowing the difference.

- Roger Clough

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com . To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.





--
Alberto.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com . Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



____________________________________________________________________
DreamMail - Your mistake not to try it once, but my mistake for your leaving off. use again www.dreammail.org
<%--DreamMail_AD_END-->

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything- l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.



http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to